The Hypocrisy of Islam


UI – Part 622 – The Hypocrisy of Islam

What is ‘hypocrisy’? Defined: Hypocrisy – the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense. 

Pretense

First focus on ‘pretense.’ My debate question is whether Islam is a ‘pretense’ to be a religion? Having their god, Allah, as a source of inspiration and inducement to fight to act as imperialists to make conquests, the goal a World All for Allah, is more a directive. That directive coupled with a manual of requirements to be obeyed, the Quran, is more militaristic than moral. It would not be an error to make reference to the Scripture of Islam as a Military Manual.  It refers to war or fighting over 100 times.  The targets are non-Muslims, infidels, critics of Islam, moderate Muslims and even Muslims that explore their independence and seek knowledge of alternatives to the ideology of Islam. 

Islam is a pretense. As one example, the Iran Shiite Ayatollah is a sham, a disgrace to Shia. Both are portrayed and propagandized as religious, a way of life for followers. However it is the ONLY way of life, as alternatives to Shia, by god, are not to be considered. To do so subjects subjects to smiting, dismemberment of head from body. Ungodly more than God-like. Death for apostasy. No allowance for third party discussion, conversation, criticism or debate. That is considered mischief. 

Such is ‘mischief’ if a Muslim might be exposed to an alternate style of life, a different pathway toward salvation, greater freedom, even democracy. 

Unjust Wars

Islam, from the days of their self-proclaimed Prophet, Muhammad, have never engaged in ‘just’ wars. They have all been for profit, for personal satisfaction, for greed. Allah is but an excuse, not a justification.  Born from the Bedouin desert life of raiding others when their own oasis ran dry, a daily habit or sport of conquest, the taking of ones treasure, the stronger the ruler.  When not in battle, in preparation to do so when more prepared, better trained, was the common practice, sharpening their swords as it were. Muhammad was a child of such an environment, bringing to his self-made cause the habits of his culture.  Such past characteristics, with the added desires of the Prophet and his subsequent Caliphs produced armies and the military manuals used as the doctrine, Scripture, as justification, promoted as such, for being referred to as a ‘religion.’ This can be called the “Might is Right” theory of justice in war. 

The debate continues as to God and Allah being equal.  Linguistically, that may be true.  But in practice, that is not true.  God is Love. Allah is an Arabic word for god. If referring to the Biblical God, yes Allah and God are the same.  Love.   But that is not the Allah of the Quran. Allah of the Quran is a fraud, a fake, a false prophet or god, a tool of the jihadists, a director of haters for those who refuse to obey the autocrats, the totalitarians, the ulema, that embrace Islam for their purposes.   They live for the life of the 7th century marauders. From a historical past when men feared God, Muhammad found a practical use for Allah to achieve his ends.  He gave them his god, Allah.  He took from the Bible enough to support his cause and place a thumb on his followers.  He then shared inspirational thoughts that led to a manual for Islam.  However that manual, the Quran, became more a law book for the subsequent kings of Islam, those that murdered the Prophet (Abu Baker and Umar, and their daughters).

Wars of Islam are unjust, selfish conquests, more for treasure and self aggrandizement than to make the world a better place.  Do you think Iran is a better place because the Ayatollah and his Mullahs gained control?  Or Saudi Arabia is a haven of love and freedom with the Monarchy Saud family as overseers?

Just Wars

Many might argue there is no such thing as a ‘just war.’  St. Augustine, a 4th century Catholic theologian and philosopher, along with that of St. Thomas Aquinas, another rational thinker, who wrote at the height of the Crusading era. Aquinas asserts in his Summa Theologica that three requirements must be met in order for a war to be considered ‘just:’ 

  1. First, a war must be waged by a lawful sovereign. Sovereign rulers bear the duty of protecting their people from harm and injustice, and therefore only they may undertake the action of declaring and waging war. Just Authority
  2. Second, a war must have a just cause. Examples of just causes would be protecting one’s people from the invasion and harm of another state, or intervening to halt some other grave injustice. While a few medieval writers argued that wars of conversion were just, the greater weight of religious scholarship rejected this. Just Cause
  3. Finally, a war must be waged with right intention. Aquinas quotes Augustine in saying that, “True religion looks upon as peaceful those wars that are waged not for motives of aggrandizement, or cruelty, but with the object of securing peace, of punishing evil-doers, and of uplifting the good.”  Right Intention

Added to the list, as #4, could be as a Last Resort. All other means exhausted no other option but war remains. 

Augustine felt that ‘original sin’ makes human moral behavior nearly impossible, except for the Grace of God (Biblical God.)

Islamic leaders, sovereigns, meet none of the criteria noted, except for the Might is Right approach, with the caveat that in their hands the justice they protect is not that of the commoners, but of themselves, the elitists, the rulers. If the goal was as a peacekeeper, to insure freedoms, that of human freedom, equality, and liberty, a strong military force that insures justice for everyone might be given some latitude.  

Freedom of Religion – Not

Religions, other than Islam, are inherently free. Islam is not due to Apostasy Laws. You can volunteer to join, that is from another religion, but you cannot leave. That is incarceration, not religion. That is hypocrisy in religion, in Islam.

Where there is freedom of religion you can worship as you prefer, except in the most extreme circumstances. Your religious convictions are your own, but not to be imposed, or legislated upon others.  That is not the case in Islam. 

A religious person may be intolerant of the practices of others, but that is not to be applied as a matter of sexism, racism, or homophobia.  It can be an open criticism, but not to become a rule of law, unless in doing so the whole of society, as a common practice to provide safety and security for all, is provided.  Gays are not to be tossed off rooftops, even if you oppose gays.  State you convictions, your reason, allow debate, and let God be the judge. 

Call me an Islamophobe, even though I feel that is more a political word than a manner of ‘hate’ speech, as I find Islam a mis-guided ideology formed by control zealots for their own personal gain.  I criticize Islam for its restrictions on freedom of conscious, choice, opinion and independence.  It does not believe in equality, human rights or liberty. And it acts as if God, my Biblical God, is as Allah. 

Discrimination

‘Discrimination’ is a term that often is used as an ‘intolerant’ practice by religious persons.  I feel it is impossible to be totally ‘indiscriminate.’  That seems to be the posture Democrats take, but it is a hypocritical practice.  Democrats are elitists.  They may appear to all manner of ‘folk,’ be they gay, trans, sexual preferences, of a variety of minorities, races or cultures, even religions, as tolerant, just not towards conservatives or Republicans.  They have made themselves perfectly clear. Their history proves otherwise.  They do not follow through as indiscriminate. They may seek the vote with promises to everyone, everywhere, but fail to deliver.  Why, because they hold themselves to the higher standard, they discriminate, placing themselves above the fray. 

Democrats, maybe not all, let’s say the progressives, liberals and secularists, do not hold God in high esteem, as they see followers of God, of Judeo-Christian policies and practices, as restrictive of their own habits, or desires. They even politically attack the foundational Judeo-Christian elements of America’s society and Constitution. Read the book Did America Have A Christian Founding?, by Mark David Hall.  I firmly ascribe to the concept that government is not our moral compass, as a higher power must guide people, their personal decisions, independently.  Justification for sinful actions because the government decrees it by law does not make it any less sinful, to the believer.  They discriminate against the Christian God, and for what reason I cannot properly explain, unless they are more pagan than god-fearing.  Societies such as in China, North Korea, and Russia continue to strive to eliminate God.  They have not been successful. 

Christians may discriminate.  Jews may discriminate. Muslims may discriminate, and so on.  They tend to want to be with those that believe as they do.  In most cases their doors are open, welcoming others to join, for seekers, for those with an open mind willing to listen and possibly decide for themselves.  But the doors are not open for those wanting to attack, to harm, or destroy.  Open spaces can be used to promote religious, political even ideological ideas.  But in a House of Worship those that enter should be respectful of those in attendance, even if not in accord. Outside the doors is another matter.  And outside the doors if one should choose to enter the House of another, then let them be.  That is not the case for the Muslim.  

Proselytize in the open square, on public property, encourage or debate what you believe, peacefully.  Treat those who disagree, call them opponents, with dignity, tell the truth, and engage in debate with civility. Even in the open a Muslim will seek to fight those who disagree with Islam, shout them down, throw acid in their faces, even behead them in the streets. What is wrong with them? For another to share their faith with a Muslim is to persecute the Muslim, and persecution of a Muslim is cause to fight, to main, to kill. That is not what a religion does.  Fear God, yes, but you should not have to fear man, especially not a man of God.  By fearing a man of Allah, you must know that he/she is not a person of God.  The alternative, a demon. Understand Islam.  

Hypocrisy of Islam

Everyone has the right, yes, the right, of judging for themselves. As a religion, as said by George Mason (1776 draft Article XVI of Virginia’s Declaration of Rights), “the duty we owe to our divine and omnipotent Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be governed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence (emphasis my own); and therefore that all men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, unpunished and unrestrained by the (rulers).”   

In Islam the ‘rights’ of individuals to exercise their conscience is denied.  The State often uses the religion as its constitutional basis, thus the rule of law.  Vengeance becomes that of man, not of God alone. In Islam man acts as if they are Allah, believing they are God.  That is hypocrisy.   Civic authorities in Islam make every effort to compel belief. Dissenters are not tolerated. That is fact. There is no liberty of conscience.  If there were true religion would flourish. 

Islam distorts facts and reality for their own purpose.

1321440765-Hypocrisy

Grace and Peace

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s